I think a no perm ban would be a good idea.

Read a timeline of it HERE

Just so you know, Obama and his family attend a non-denominational Christian church in the Chicago area.

I’m human, I’m willing to admit I may be on the wrong side of things. Last week’s poll topic, “What do you think about religious discussions on IFz?” was a clear admission of that. If the votes overwhelmingly indicated most people wanted the religious discussion, who am I to stand in the way of our userbase?

Please note the results:

* I’m upset they’re gone, hope they return without restrictions. -> 39%

* I’m glad they’re gone, hope they never return -> 37%

* I’m glad they’re gone, maybe they can return in carefully controlled circumstances -> 12%

* I’m upset they’re gone, would like to see returned in carefully controlled circumstances -> 12%

A simple majority is not enough to allow the discussions, it would take a super-majority.

Consider the analogy of trying to put an adult-entertainment store in someplace like the Grand Teton Mall. Maybe 55% would like it there, but they would not stop going to the mall if the adult-oriented business was not there. However, the 45% who hated it probably would stop patronizing the mall if the adult-oriented business was there. The probable loss of business is too great.

I see something else in these numbers that I do not think anyone else does, and I hope you don’t think I tricked you.

Note that there were four choices, but essentially three questions were asked:

1-Do you want unrestricted religious talk at IFz?

2-Do you want no religious talk at IFz?

3-Do you want religious talk allowed only in a structured way at IFz?

Two questions really addressed the same thing: structured discussion.

Whereas only 24% of visitors were willing to engage in structured religious discussions, in a way to encourage intelligent talk without bashing or hurting feelings, this is clearly a minority of our visitors.

This is the last I’ll say on the subject for a long time. I’m sure valid religious topics will come up again in the future (like if Mitt Romney becomes a serious presidential candidate), and we will look at structured discussions at that time.

Until then, please refrain from talking about religious topics. Feel free to say things like (when a kid my pastor said this) when it is anecdotal and not core to your point, but let’s generally avoid the topic.

I for one think we have had much better quality discussions happen on IFz since.

I really like both the article you wrote about these modifications to posts, including the link to the discussion, and having the rules posted above further posts anyone writes.

I hope we as people can learn from this opportunity and engage in productive discussions. Also, I sincerely hope we never try intentionally hurt, mock or put some one else down in manner. This can be wonderful teaching expierence.

What I REALLY, REALLY hope is instead of being so quick to blame and argue, we can learn the skill of asking questions. This will help ensure we understand what the writers conveyed their message accurately.

I’ve seen several arguments stop before they progressed because someone was wise enough to say s/he wasn’t sure s/he had understood what the writer inteneded. I strongly encourage any user who isn’t sure how a poster meant a comment to ask instead of assume.

Likewise, asking another if s/he can explain their view further or in a different way will only deepen the attempts at truly sharing communication between us all.

I’m looking forward to many great subjects and discussions with my peers here.

Joe- Thanks for letting all of us (those who decided to offer input) have the opportunity to do so! I think these new guidelines look impessive for a fist revision.

Best,
Kerry

We just came off of trying that, and it does not work. It’s nice in theory, but not in practice.

Let’s hope the new guidelines help decrease negative energy in comments.

And then if it is banned, can we vote to start our own again anyway? GRIN!

Best,
Kerry

Usually, revisions only strengthen writing or products.

Thanks to all who commented. I’ve thought about some things differently. I’m not sure where we’ll be in 6 months about religion and other hot topics, but this is a good example of how users shape the policy.

7. Users should flag moderator attention to inappropriate comments by typing /// FLAG /// “quoted inappropriate comment text”

I will also state that registration is not being required for comments, and religious talk is not being banned outright.

However, both of those decisions will be revisited quickly if inappropriate comments are still posted.

Sound okay?